Ideology over evidence: pronatalist media discourse and its (dis)connection from U.S. fertility trends

Pronatalismthe ideology promoting increased birth rates as a political and civilizational imperativehas experienced a resurgence in U.S. media and policy discourse, yet scholars have long argued it functions as ideological framing rather than evidence-based demographic policy.This study tests that argument directly by examining whether empirical changes in fertility rates predict the volume and tone of pronatalism-adjacent media coverage across politically distinct U.S. outlets.Drawing on age-and race/ethnicity-specific fertility data, alongside article volume and tone data from the Global Database of Events, Language, and Tone (GDELT) over the period 2017-2022, we analyze coverage of four themesfertility rates, population and demographic change, aging populations, and reproductive and maternal health-across 23 conservative, progressive, and neutral news outlets.Using linear regression models with year fixed effects, we find that changes in fertility rates do not significantly predict article volume for any outlet type or theme.Results for tone are similarly null, with one exception: increases in fertility among women aged 25-44 are significantly associated with more positive coverage of reproductive and maternal health in progressive outlets, likely reflecting political rather than demographic dynamics.The most pronounced shifts in coverageparticularly conservative outlets' dramatically more positive tone following the 2020 electionappear driven by electoral context rather than demographic reality.These findings provide quantitative support for the claim that pronatalist media discourse selectively deploys demographic evidence in order to operate as an ideological regime of truth.